Questions
by neekabe
Summary: A series of questions on War, Innocence, and Morality and Heeros responses to those questions. Kinda strange but interesting none the less Chapter 2: Quatres ideas.
1. Heero

Questions    
  
A/N: Okay right from the get go I want to let you know that this is very strange...it is the result of trying to avoid reading about Rene Descartes because trying to understand him just makes my head hurt @_@ and since I had never really used any dialogue before i decided to do this instead..   
  
it is based on a round-table style discussion, (basically an informal debate) between Heero and someone else (call it a her just because if I said him I'd get confused with Heero) She begins.   
  
I also want to know if anyone can guess what Heero means when he says "I've already shown you" (hint look at his responces [aka defences] to her questions [aka attacks]) Also let me know if it at all makes sence ^_^   
  
  
I do not own Gundam Wing...that really isn't important here but better safe than sorry ^_^   
  
  
**Questions**   
"Can a child be as destructive as an adult?"  
  
"They are"  
  
"But a child has not learned hatred...and has less strength."  
  
"They can be taught hatred and if all a child knows is war and death, hatred or anger are not necessary. Weapons are so automated now that there is no need for physical strength"   
  
"But an innocent child couldn't kill."   
  
"A child can pull a trigger just as easily as you, and they haven't yet learned morals to get in the way. There is no such thing as innocence."   
  
"What about those that avoid conflict? Those who have never fought nor do they want to fight? Are they innocent?"   
  
"The are just stronger that I am, are able to resist the corruption."   
  
"But what about morals. Is it morally right to kill someone for a cause?"   
  
"Only if you are just as willing to die for that cause."   
  
"Would you be willing to die for a cause you'd kill for?"   
  
"I am"   
  
"What about people who will die. What if they aren't willing to die for that cause?"   
  
"Then they shouldn't be fighting"   
  
"What if they don't have a choice?"   
  
"There is always a choice"   
  
"How so?"   
  
"Life or death. That's the choice."   
  
"Why do people fight?"   
  
"To protect that which is theirs"   
  
"What about those people that have nothing?"   
  
"There is always something"   
  
"Like?"   
  
"Other people are alive and happy. I will fight to protect them."   
  
"_You _will?"   
  
"Yes. _I_ will"   
  
"Why?"   
  
"Because it is the duty of the strong to protect those who cannot protect themselves"   
  
"So which side in wrong in a war where both sides are simply protecting the weak?"   
  
"There is no good or evil in war, just opposing sides"   
  
"So war is never right?"   
  
"War is evil"   
  
"What about a war to get rid of an oppressor?"   
  
"That can be done more efficiently other ways. War is the result of failure"   
  
"So a country with a tyrannical leader has failed?"   
  
"Yes"   
  
"How?"   
  
"By not getting rid of that leader"   
  
"But getting rid of them means war, which you said is wrong"   
  
"No. There are other ways"   
  
"Care to explain?"   
  
"No"   
  
"So what is the best way to fight these battles?"   
  
"I've already shown you"   
  
"Where are you going?   
  
"To wage war against the other side"   
  
"But you said war was wrong!"   
  
"I said war was evil and that it was a failure. So am I"   
  
  
  
  
  
***end***


	2. Quatre

Questions: Quatre I had been considering doing a 'sequel' to Questions pretty much since I first wrote it, but it's really rather hard to come up with a new topic for the other pilots, so it was put on the back-burner until I could come up with something.   
  
Apparently my muses like school. How do I know this? Because this little fic attacked me in the middle of Calculus class, you know the whole idea of limits, not actually being at a point but being so close it doesn't really matter? Yeah... This ended up being scribbled all over my calculus notes....   
The others will be up soon!   
(Duos was born out of Calssics, Trowa's and Wufei's from philosophy reserch. University is good for muses ^_^ )   
  
So this is the same deal as the first chapter. The questioner begins.   
  
Nothing is really mentioned, but just to be safe, I do not own Gundam Wing, nor am I making any profit from this work.   
**Questions: Quatre **   
  
"Can societal innocence ever be regained after war?"   
  
"No."   
  
"Why?"   
  
"Because someone will always remember, someone will always hold the sorrow of meaningless death."   
  
"So they world can never return to the way it was before war time?"   
  
"No exactly the same, but it will eventually become something so close that only a few people will be able to tell the difference."   
  
"What do you mean?"   
  
"Innocence cannot be regained, but naïveté will eventually take its place."   
  
"Is there that much of a difference between the two?"   
  
"Not much, but enough. Innocence it purity. Naïveté makes what has happened worthless."   
  
"Makes the result of war, peace, worthless?"   
  
"Yes, because if they are not aware of the war it will be repeated."   
  
"But that is this not the same for innocence? An innocent one is not aware of war."   
  
"Naïveté is a deliberate path, you know of something, yet you choose not to understand it. Innocence is simply that you can't imagine the possibility of the event."   
  
"In that case wouldn't innocence be worse? At least a naive person is aware of the possibility."   
  
"But if they chose to ignore it in the first place, why should they pay attention the second time? An innocent can be defiled, taught. They can be made to see it that is what is necessary."   
  
"And after seeing they could choose to ignore it, or disbelieve it."   
  
"Or they could do something. They have potential at least."   
  
"So what a war really does is rob the world of its potential?"   
  
"Yes"   
  
"Potential for what?"   
  
"To put it simply, the potential for peace."   
  
"So once people know of war they can never have peace? You're contradicting yourself."   
  
"They can never have a pure peace."   
  
"What do you mean?"   
  
"They can never have a perfect constant peace. Someone will always know that war is possible someone will choose to ignore the signs. They possibility has been planted."   
  
"So once war begins there is little point to ending it?"   
  
"No there can be an imperfect peace, as close to peace as humanity can get, which is still significantly better than war. It is simply that humanity can no long hope to attain the pure ideal of peace."   
  
"So how could war begin in the first place if the world was populated with innocent people unaware of the idea of war?"   
  
"I was talking about societal innocence, in humanity as a whole. There are always exceptions to a rule. Just like there can be innocents before a war there can be.... impure souls before a war."   
  
"So ultimately there is little chance for for humanity if before and after war there are always a number of innocents and a number of 'impure souls'. The 'impure souls' will always be trying to kill the innocents. Humanity is doomed to war."   
  
"There is chance because before war they know they can kill. After a war they know they can die."   
  
"Again a meaningless difference"   
  
"Killing is the anti-thesis to life. It is not an evil in itself but... it is never beneficial. It... corrupts. This is one thing that I've been trying to get at. The world, like a person can never be the same after they have killed. You can't expect a person to just forget, you can't expect the world to forget. You must simply go on, live on. Survive."   
  
"So in a way humanity must simply adapt to the world it has created?"   
  
"If a single soldier can find a way to live beyond war, humanity surely can."   
***end***   
  



End file.
